Limits on character creation: Opinions?

[AFGNCAAP]

What do you think about any limits placed on character creation? Approve/disapprove in general? Does it depend on the kinds of limits imposed? Have you encountered some limits that go too far?

Limits can range anywhere from relatively moderate (i.e., no evil characters allowed for a heroic campaign, use of certain dice-rolling methods only or point buy, etc.) to extreme (players can't select certain races or classes at all, have particular race/class/AL combinations, or all PCs must be some sort of elf).

The limits could be thematically-based (firearms aren't allowed since gunpowder hasn't been discovered yet, etc.), or they could be more mechanically-based (players can't select a race with a Level Adjustment over 0 for creating their starting 1st-level PCs, etc.).

What do you think about limits placed on character creation? Are some necessary/warranted for certain styles of play? Are some just arbitrary & meaningless?

What do you think?

 

[maddman75]

I've placed what you would call 'extreme' limits on chargen before, and with good effect. In this paticular instance, I banned barbarians and druids. Why? Because the PCs were from the civilized fuedal society, all about knights in shining armor. As it was a largely political campaign, playing the "outsider" wouldn't have worked. Barbarians were from another culture entirely, one that was opposed to the PCs. And the PC's kingdom had plenty of clerics and paladins. Druids were heathens fit only to be burned at the stake.

As the game progressed they met some of the tribes, even befriending them at the end. By barring PCs from them, it made the division between the two cultures much more relevent and appearant.

 

[Aaron L]

You have to place some restrictions on character creation to suit the characters to the type of wolrd the game will be set in. There has to be some limitations, but I generally allow any standard race and just about any class and prestige class unless it drastically goes against the grain of my setting.

Races I'm not so lenient with, as odd races can be so upsetting to the flavor of a setting as to make a game into a joke.

 

[Xavim]

I'm in full support of limits if it improves the falvour of the campaign. Disallowing classes due to that class not having a good reason for being their is always good and can't hinder the game at all. What I don't like is alignment restriction. Players should be able to play any alignment they want and the interations between a 1/2 good 1/2 evil party don't have to come to blows and can be quite interesting.

 

[Jeph]

Unless you want to be running Greyhawk With A Different Name, 'limits' can be pretty damn important. I'm not sure I'd even call them limits, I mean, is it really a limit if no dwarves exist in the game world? And some (like No Evil Characters) are just plain necessary or assumed for most games with most players. Note "most."

Basically, limits that make sense given the campaign world and desired themes are good.

--Jeff

 

[CaptainCalico]

Most of the time limits are needed to keep characters "in flavor" with a specific campaign world. I made sure to give my players an overview of my world, and then I worked with each person to make sure that they could play the concept they wanted to play while still having a PC who was plausible in the context of the world.

I never said "you can NEVER have this or this" I just made sure they understood that certain things would need more ..... inventive backtories than others.

 

[BSF]

I place limits on characters. I have a specific flavor for my campaign world and sometimes I want to run a specific type of game. Though, even with limits, if a player had a good, solid character concept and was willing to accept that certain parameters of the campaign will be difficult for them, I would probably allow it.

So, maybe my limits are more like really strong guidelines.

 

[BiggusGeekus]

1) No evils.

2) All characters must be inclined to group (a party of five loners quickly deteriorates).

3) If you dislike a particular subset of the population you must come up with your own reason why you might group with someone of that subset (e.g. a dwarf who hates elves must come up with a reason why he's grouped with an elf)

Other than that, they can do what they want. I'd like them to make characters consistent with the game world, but I don't force them.

 

[Blue Sky]

I don't apply to many limits until I find out what the players have in mind. The only thing I restrict is alignment: no evil, and no chaotic neutral. I find too many people that I've gamed with just use evil and cn as an excuse to disrupt the game. YMMV.

 

[Nine Hands]

I'm running a game where the players are elves from the nation of Evermeet. Guess what, I limited to all elves

It seems to have worked pretty well so far. Eventually I want to run a dwarven clan game too.

Limitations are good for me as a GM, I can tailor the campaign specifically to the players that way.